Posted - 2008.04.30 11:22:00 - [3]

 

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Ben Derindar

---

In 2006 I was offered a forum moderator's position

---

Are you actually allowed to say this?

---

Yes, but only because I declined it. I have also checked with CCP as to whether or not it would affect my CSM campaign, and I am assured it does not, for the same reason.

/Ben

Posted - 2008.04.30 16:49:00 - [5]

 

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Not stating an opinion makes it appear as though you either have something to hide, or you are completely uninformed about the current issues in game, or you are just plain indecisive. None of these are very attractive characteristics for a representative.

---

I have to agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. And I don't mean to come down too hard on Ben specifically, as this is something I see in many other candidates as well - but since it was raised in this thread maybe Ben can respond.

The problem with this "I won't push an agenda" tack is that not only that we do not truly know where those candidates stand because they are concealing it, but there's also little reason being put forth why they could do the job better than any other reasonably intelligent person.

If a candidate is claiming to be an Everyman With No Agenda, why do they deserve to be flown to Iceland to weigh in on big decisions more so than any other Eve player? Shouldn't our CSM reps be people that rise above the pack?

Posted - 2008.05.01 00:17:00 - [7]

 

Originally by: Kelsin

---

The problem with this "I won't push an agenda" tack is that not only that we do not truly know where those candidates stand because they are concealing it, but there's also little reason being put forth why they could do the job better than any other reasonably intelligent person.

---

There's a difference between not pushing an agenda and not having one at all. For those who do want to know more about my stance on various issues, I have discussed several on my website. Examples:

- I support an NPC-triggered aggression timer to combat logout tactics, and for proto-cloaking ships to be probeable. Also, BACON is bad.

- I support the idea of dynamic player security status changes in low-sec, so that anti-pirates can be rewarded for playing their role instead of being punished like pirates.

- I support in-game penalties for forum infringements. Isk fines, muting and bans for those who continue to flout the rules.

But at the same time, if you can convince me otherwise, then I'm open to a change of thinking. That's the point I'm trying to get across: not that I don't have a position, but that that position is largely negotiable.

/Ben

Posted - 2008.05.03 01:56:00 - [9]

 

Originally by: Hamfast

---

Have you ever tried invention?

---

I was part of a small scheme that a corpmate and I attempted to set up not long after invention was first introduced. He did the inventing (Electronic Attack Ships mainly), then sold each BPC to me at his cost, then I would build from those blueprints and sell within our alliance at my cost. I was only really brought in to save his factory slots, but it was still a useful learning experience for me.

However, it lasted for all of maybe a week as my own stocks of T2 components soon ran out (I had saved these from back when agents used to offer them as mission rewards) and the market costs of these components were already beginning to climb. Meanwhile, the market prices of finished T2 goods was falling fast and it wasn't long before our guys could find better deals there than what I was able to provide while still breaking even.

In the end I was left with about ten or so EASs, which I have begun to fly for myself. *shrug*

Originally by: Hamfast

---

What ideas do you have to improve invention?

---

On the strength of my limited experience above, I'm not sure I could provide suggestions that would be as qualified as I'd like them to be. But I am somewhat concerned about certain moons being the new static complexes in terms of easy isk, and would be interested in a discussion about moon minerals being depletable and spawning on different moons from time to time.

Originally by: Hamfast

---

Pilot Security Level – Should it be more important?
a. (In High Sec) – Should Concord react faster if the victim has a higher security level? If the attacker has a lower rating?
b. Should the Security Level of a system affect changes to Pilot Security level changes?
c. Should the Security Level of a Targeted Pilot have more of an effect on the security change of the attacker?

---

Short answer, yes to all, but to varying degrees on each (B and C more so than A). I'm all for more dynamic security status changes based on who engages who and where. In particular, I'd like to see anti-pirates be able to take up arms against their opposites in low-sec without being punished like pirates themselves. The existing outlaw rule is a bit simplistic for my tastes.

Originally by: Hamfast

---

Do you regularly build anything?

---

Yes. I run L4s on an alt and loot/salvage most of what drops as I go. Refining all but the good named stuff, that gives me plenty of everything I need (except trit, but cheap buy orders ftw) to build whatever I need. Ammo first, then ships for Ben to lose. Last year I built a freighter this way, and since then it's been mostly battleships until I change my mind.

Originally by: Hamfast

---

Do you regularly mine?

---

I have mined less and less as I continue to play. When I first began in 2004 it was almost all I did, both in high- and low-sec Kor-Azor and later, ninja mining arkonor in RNF-YH long before there was ever an IAC. I mined from time to time in both JQA and ASCN (late 2004/2005/early 2006), but by that time I saw NPCing as being a more fun way to earn. The last time I mined would be almost two years ago in an AXE op near LX5 in Paragon Soul; since then my involvement in mining ops has been sporadic, mainly in a hauling capacity.

Originally by: Hamfast

---

What do you think could be done to improve industry in Eve?

---

Again, I wouldn't consider myself an expert in this field, but I'd like to see something bigger than GSCs for miners to be able to use to mine in peace without ore-thieving/can-flipping being so much of an issue; something in the region of 10000m3 perhaps. Perhaps a slight nerf on mission loot as well, it's pretty easy for me to acquire mins without ever hitting a belt these days.

Originally by: Hamfast

---

You have been asked to help with new ships for industrial characters, describe a few ideas…

---

If T3 ships ever make it in, I'd like to see barges with some somewhat more durability, and haulers that fill the gap between transports and freighters.

/Ben

Posted - 2008.05.04 04:38:00 - [11]

 

Hi Viennan, good to meet you mate.

Originally by: Viennan

---

As a fellow New Zealander, I have to ask your opinion on the daily maintenance which hits during primetime play hours. I know the maintenance is vital to keep the server playable, but there are remedies CCP could try to make it easier on Oceanic players (pushing the maintenance forward one hour each day, for example).

Are you affected by this? (are you playing when the servers go down everyday at 11pm NZST).

---

Occasionally, but I'm typically almost ready to go to bed at that time anyway, especially during the week. My job's hours are from 8:30am to 5pm, and I need to be up at 7am in order to get there on time, so for me personally it's not in my best interest to play much beyond that anyway. People as ugly as I need all the beauty sleep they can get!

Originally by: Viennan

---

Do you think it is hampering the ability for EVE to build an Oceanic playerbase?

---

Perhaps for the Aussies more so than the Kiwis. I don't mind an 11pm DT so much where we are, but it starts anywhere from 7pm to 9pm for them, so I do feel sorry for them in this situation more so than ourselves.

Originally by: Viennan

---

Would you be prepared to try and put forward ideas to the council to remedy the problem?
What would you propose to solve the problem? (Assuming 1 hour daily maintenance must take place).

---

I'll answer these two together. Firstly, you may already be aware but it isn't always a full hour each DT. Particularly on weekends when it's just a matter of rebooting everything, the game can be back up in as little as 20 minutes. But anyway:

If I had what I thought was a good solution, I'd certainly put it out there. The problem is that right now, I just don't have one. If DT were to be moved for our benefit, where would it go so that it doesn't affect even more people elsewhere? Is there even such a time?

The percentage of players from NZ was revealed at the last Fanfest to be something like 0.6%, and I don't recall the Aussie numbers, but going by that Kiwi figure maybe 3%? Even allowing a few more % for Hawaiians, East Asians etc, it's still not a large proportion.

Over the years I've seen the issue pop up once or twice every couple of months from somebody at our end of the world, and it's always the same thing. "We Aussies/Kiwis miss out etc, why can't DT be moved?" The answer has pretty much always been the same as well: "where else could it go without it affecting even more people?".

Originally by: Viennan

---

I feel that the issue is being overlooked, as players from the US and Europe would hardly even notice the maintenance occurs, but as our primetime play hours are the time with the least amount of activity, we lose an hour each day.

---

I'm not so sure that it's necessarily been overlooked, but I think over time the general consensus has just been that there simply isn't an ideal alternative, as it's an issue that affects - on a worldwide scale - only a minority of the playerbase, and with no new ideas coming to light, there hasn't really been any impetus for further discussion on the subject as of late.

But if you have any suggestions, now's the time to raise them. Why would you like DT to be pushed forward an hour?

/Ben

Posted - 2008.05.04 16:50:00 - [13]

 

I will be addressing each candidate with the same questions ableit it might be a little late:

1) What do you think about more PVE scenarios, ones which would incorporate a large section of the EVE universe. Perhaps like a war between the races, or a war against a different race. Perhaps it would be a war against a pirate corp where PCs are encouraged to come help out the fleet. This could allow players to get more of a feel in some way fleet battles as well.

2) Along the lines of the above statement, how would you feel if the EVE universe had a vote in how their races interacted. Perhaps in order to get users more involved the races would submit 'Resolutions' to the players on actions they take. Perhaps the Gallente Federation gives some offense to the Caldari State or vice versa, maybe the resolution to those that are members of the Caldari State would say something like, "Should the Caldari State retaliate with military force against system XYZ for said offense?". Then there could be some possible PVE event taken in that sector of space. The Caldari State can then give real-time missions to players who wish to participate be it material gathering, intelligence, combat missions, mercenary action, etc.

3) How would you feel about opening Invention to invent new items that they design, potentially completely new items to the EVE universe? I believe giving the players the ability to customize items and perhaps make something completely new would greatly increase their involvement and enjoyment of the game. This would introduce even more learning skills for those that want to do industry and allow them to decide how and what will improve ships. Perhaps even allowing researchers to invent totally new kinds of ships.

4) How would you feel if the EVE universe could start impacting in some way on 0.0? Pirates and alliances in 0.0 often have influence in Empire space and low sec, what if the tables were reversed? What if players in empire space could pass resolutions for the races to clear out temporarily portions of low sec, perhaps even attempt to clear out portions of 0.0? The idea here would not to attact home systems, but perhaps fringe systems. This could help introduce empire players to 0.0 and pvp, it could also help keep in check mega alliances and factions. In addition this could allow empire players the 'occasional' chance to get some resources in 0.0 if they aid the initiative.

5) Finally how would you feel about creating and opening events to all players and not just the wealthiest alliances in EVE? There could be many talented pilots out there that want to compete for fame and glory, but may not have the ISK to do it. Perhaps if EVE provided weekly/monthly tournaments around the EVE universe and then allowed the winners to compete in a bracket system up to a finale, it would encourage even more interaction. Instead of just giving some enormous prize once/twice a year, they could give smaller prizes for each stage of the contest leading up to the ultimage prize. These could also include side contests like 1v1/2v2/etc frigate/cruiser fights. Find out who the best 1v1 player is, or who the best tandem team is, etc.

Posted - 2008.05.05 02:02:00 - [15]

 

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

I will be addressing each candidate with the same questions ableit it might be a little late:

---

It's never too late.

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

What do you think about more PVE scenarios, ones which would incorporate a large section of the EVE universe. Perhaps like a war between the races, or a war against a different race. Perhaps it would be a war against a pirate corp where PCs are encouraged to come help out the fleet. This could allow players to get more of a feel in some way fleet battles as well.

---

This sounds a lot like what factional warfare could turn out to be. On a personal note though, I'd like to add that if you're looking to take part in fleet battles, there's no substituting the real thing; find a PvP corp and go for it.

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

Along the lines of the above statement, how would you feel if the EVE universe had a vote in how their races interacted. Perhaps in order to get users more involved the races would submit 'Resolutions' to the players on actions they take.

---

Well, the Amarr faction is the biggest and the Caldari the smallest in storyline terms, yet the opposite is true when assessing capsuleer population. Thus from an RP perspective, how fair would granting such power to us pod pilots be? What's to stop one particular faction from gaining more dominance in the game than perhaps CCP would like? Conversely, if some sort of artificial restraint was put in place to prevent such lopsided scenarios from occurring, would there be any value in such a system at all in the first place?

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

The Caldari State can then give real-time missions to players who wish to participate be it material gathering, intelligence, combat missions, mercenary action, etc.

---

Given that the end result of such missions would be more or less the same as what we have now (in terms of isk, loot, standings etc), would a real-time factor really be worth the effort of implementing?

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

How would you feel about opening Invention to invent new items that they design, potentially completely new items to the EVE universe? I believe giving the players the ability to customize items and perhaps make something completely new would greatly increase their involvement and enjoyment of the game.

---

If Tech 3 ever makes it into Eve, this looks like an interesting way in which CCP could go about implementing it. I imagine that marketing of such items would probably be restricted to the contract system were it to happen, but no objection from me, really.

/Ben